Madhyamaka Treatise (Zhong Lun), Fascicle One

餘入餘煩惱，皆亦復如是。」

and the remaining sense bases and the remaining afflictions are all likewise."

如見、可見、見者無合故，染、可染、染者亦應無合。如說見、可見、見者三法，則說聞、可聞、聞者餘入等。如說染、可染、染者，則說瞋、可瞋、瞋者餘煩惱等。復次：

Just as seeing, the seen and the seer have no combination, so defilement, the defiled and the defiler should also have no combination. In saying these three dharmas of seeing, the seen and the seer, one has also said hearing, the heard and the hearer and the remaining sense bases. In saying defilement, the defiled and the defiler, one has also said anger, the angered and the angry and the remaining afflictions. Furthermore:

「異法當有合，見等無有異，

"Different dharmas are what could combine, but seeing and the rest are not different,

異相不成故，見等云何合？」

and since the characteristic of difference is not established, how could seeing and the rest combine?"

凡物皆以異故有合，而見等異相不可得，是故無合。復次：

All things combine because of difference, but the characteristic of difference among seeing and the rest cannot be found, so there is no combination. Furthermore:

「非但見等法，異相不可得；

"Not only for seeing and these other dharmas can the characteristic of difference not be found;

所有一切法，皆亦無異相。」

for all dharmas whatsoever, there is no characteristic of difference either."

非但見、可見、見者等三事異相不可得，一切法皆無異相。

Not only can the characteristic of difference among the three matters of seeing, the seen and the seer not be found, but no dharma has a characteristic of difference.

問曰：何故無有異相？

The questioner says: Why is there no characteristic of difference?

答曰：

The answerer says:

「異因異有異，異離異無異；

"Different exists because of the different; apart from the different there is no different;

若法從因出，是法不異因。」

if a dharma comes out of a cause, this dharma is not different from its cause."

汝所謂異，是異因異法故名為異。離異法不名為異。何以故？若法從眾緣生，是法不異因，因壞果亦壞故。如因梁椽等有舍，舍不異梁椽，梁椽等壞舍亦壞故。

What you call the different, this different is called different because of the existence of a different dharma. Apart from a different dharma it is not called different. Why? If a dharma arises from many conditions, this dharma is not different from its cause, because when the cause is destroyed the effect is destroyed too. Like a house existing because of beams and rafters, the house is not different from the beams and rafters; when the beams and rafters are destroyed, the house is also destroyed.

問曰：若有定異法，有何咎？

The questioner says: If there is a determinate different dharma, what fault is there?

答曰：

The answerer says:

「若離從異異，應餘異有異；

"If apart from the 'different that comes from the different' there were another different, there should be another difference on top of the remaining difference;

離從異無異，是故無有異。」

apart from 'coming from the different' there is no different, so there is no difference."

若離從異有異法者，則應離餘異有異法。而實離從異無有異法，是故無餘異。如離五指異，有拳異者，拳異應於瓶等異物有異。今離五指異，拳異不可得，是故拳異於瓶等無有異法。

If apart from "coming from the different" there were a different dharma, there should be a different dharma apart from the remaining difference. But in fact, apart from "coming from the different" there is no different dharma, so there is no remaining difference. Like the difference of a fist apart from the difference of the five fingers: the difference of a fist should also have difference with respect to different things like pots. Now, apart from the difference of the five fingers, the difference of the fist cannot be found, so the difference of the fist has no different dharma with respect to pots and the like.

問曰：我經說，異相不從眾緣生，分別總相故有異相，因異相故有異法。

The questioner says: My scripture says: the characteristic of difference does not arise from many conditions; because the general characteristic is distinguished there is the characteristic of difference, and depending on the characteristic of difference there is a different dharma.

答曰：

The answerer says:

「異中無異相，不異中亦無；

"In the different there is no characteristic of difference, and in the not-different there is none either;

無有異相故，則無此彼異。」

since there is no characteristic of difference, there is no difference of this and that."

汝言分別總相故有異相，因異相故有異法。若爾者，異相從眾緣生，如是即說眾緣法，是異相離異法不可得故。異相因異法而有，不能獨成。今異法中無異相。何以故？先有異法故，何用異相？不異法中亦無異相。何以故？若異相在不異法中，不名不異法。若二處俱無，即無異相，異相無故此彼法亦無。復次，異法無故亦無合。

You say that because the general characteristic is distinguished there is the characteristic of difference, and depending on the characteristic of difference there is a different dharma. If so, the characteristic of difference arises from many conditions, and this too is speaking of the dharma of many conditions, because this characteristic of difference cannot be found apart from the different dharma. The characteristic of difference exists depending on the different dharma and cannot be established alone. Now within the different dharma there is no characteristic of difference. Why? The different dharma already exists beforehand, so what is the characteristic of difference for? In the not-different dharma there is no characteristic of difference either. Why? If the characteristic of difference were in the not-different dharma, it would not be called a not-different dharma. If it is in neither place, there is no characteristic of difference; when the characteristic of difference does not exist, this dharma and that dharma do not exist either. Furthermore, when the different dharma does not exist, there is no combination.

「是法不自合，異法亦不合，

"This dharma does not combine with itself, and a different dharma does not combine either,

合者及合時，合法亦皆無。」

and the one who combines, the time of combining, and the dharma of combining all do not exist."

是法自體不合，以一故，如一指不自合。異法亦不合，以異故，異事已成不須合故。如是思惟，合法不可得。是故說合者、合時、合法皆不可得。

The own-substance of this dharma does not combine, because it is one, as one finger does not combine with itself. A different dharma does not combine either, because it is different, and the matter of difference is already established and need not combine again. Thinking in this way, the dharma of combination cannot be found. So it is said that the one who combines, the time of combining and the dharma of combining all cannot be found.

龍樹菩薩造梵志青目釋

Verses composed by the Bodhisattva Nagarjuna, commentary by the brahmin Pingala (Qingmu).

姚秦三藏鳩摩羅什譯

Translated by the Tripitaka Master Kumarajiva of the Later Qin, during the Yao Qin period.

觀有無品第十五(十一偈)

Chapter 15: Examination of Being and Non-being (eleven verses)

問曰：諸法各有性，以有力用故，如瓶有瓶性、布有布性，是性眾緣合時則出。

The questioner says: Dharmas each have their own nature, because they have power and function. Like a pot has the nature of a pot and cloth has the nature of cloth, this nature emerges when the many conditions come together.

答曰：

The answerer says:

「眾緣中有性，是事則不然；

"That nature exists within the many conditions is not right;

性從眾緣出，即名為作法。」

if nature comes out of the many conditions, it is called a made dharma."

若諸法有性，不應從眾緣出。何以故？若從眾緣出，即是作法，無有定性。

If dharmas had nature, it should not come out of the many conditions. Why? If it comes out of the many conditions, it is a made dharma and has no determinate nature.

問曰：若諸法性從眾緣作，有何咎？

The questioner says: If the nature of dharmas is made from the many conditions, what fault is there?

答曰：

The answerer says:

「性若是作者，云何有此義？

"If nature were made, how could that statement hold?

性名為無作，不待異法成。」

Nature is called unmade, not depending on a different dharma to be established."

如金雜銅則非真金，如是若有性，則不須眾緣，若從眾緣出，當知無真性。又性若決定，不應待他出，非如長短、彼此，無定性故待他而有。問曰：諸法若無自性，應有他性。

Like gold mixed with copper is not true gold; likewise, if there were nature, it would not need the many conditions; if it comes out of the many conditions, one should know there is no true nature. Moreover, if nature were determinate, it should not need to depend on another to come out, unlike long and short, or this and that, which depend on another because they have no fixed nature. The questioner says: If dharmas have no self-nature, there should be other-nature.

答曰：

The answerer says:

「法若無自性，云何有他性？

"If a dharma has no self-nature, how can there be other-nature?

自性於他性，亦名為他性。」

The self-nature of another is also called other-nature."

諸法性眾緣作故，亦因待成，故無自性。若爾者，他性於他亦是自性，亦從眾緣生相待故，亦無。無故，云何言諸法從他性生？他性亦是自性故。

The nature of dharmas is made by many conditions and is established through mutual dependence, so there is no self-nature. If so, other-nature, on its own side, is also self-nature, also arising from many conditions and dependent, so it also does not exist. If it does not exist, how can one say dharmas arise from other-nature? Because other-nature is also self-nature.

問曰：若離自性、他性有諸法，有何咎？

The questioner says: If dharmas exist apart from self-nature and other-nature, what fault is there?

答曰：

The answerer says:

「離自性他性，何得更有法？

"Apart from self-nature and other-nature, where could a dharma be?

若有自他性，諸法則得成。」

If there are self-nature and other-nature, dharmas can be established."

汝說離自性、他性有法者，是事不然。若離自性他性，則無有法。何以故？有自性、他性法則成，如瓶體是自性、依物是他性。

You say that there are dharmas apart from self-nature and other-nature, but this is not right. If apart from self-nature and other-nature, there is no dharma. Why? With self-nature and other-nature, a dharma is established, as with a pot, whose substance is self-nature and the things it rests on are other-nature.

問曰：若以自性、他性破有者，今應有無。

The questioner says: If being is refuted using self-nature and other-nature, there should now be non-being.

答曰：

The answerer says:

「有若不成者，無云何可成？

"If being is still not established, how can non-being be established?

因有有法故，有壞名為無。」

Because there is the dharma of 'being,' when being is destroyed it is called non-being."

若汝已受有不成者，亦應受無亦無。何以故？有法壞敗故名無，是無因有壞而有。復次：

If you have already admitted that being is not established, you should also admit that non-being does not exist either. Why? When a dharma of being is destroyed, it is called non-being, and this non-being exists because being is destroyed. Furthermore:

「若人見有無，見自性他性；

"If a person sees being and non-being, sees self-nature and other-nature;

如是則不見，佛法真實義。」

then he does not see the true meaning of the Buddha's Dharma."

若人深著諸法，必求有見。若破自性則見他性，若破他性則見有，若破有則見無，若破無則迷惑。若利根著心薄者，知滅諸見安隱故，更不生四種戲論，是人則見佛法真實義。是故說上偈。復次：

When people are deeply attached to dharmas, they must seek a view of being. If self-nature is refuted they see other-nature, if other-nature is refuted they see being, if being is refuted they see non-being, and if non-being is refuted they are confused. If one's faculties are sharp and one's attachment is thin, and one knows that extinguishing all views is peace, one no longer gives rise to these four conceptual proliferations, and this person sees the true meaning of the Buddha's Dharma. So the above verse is spoken. Furthermore:

「佛能滅有無，如化迦旃延，

"The Buddha can extinguish being and non-being, as in teaching Katyayana,

經中之所說，離有亦離無。」

in the sutra it is said: apart from being and apart from non-being."

《刪陀迦旃延經》中，佛為說正見義離有離無。若諸法中少決定有者，佛不應破有，無若破有，則人謂為無。佛通達諸法相故，說二俱無。是故汝應捨有無見。復次：

In the Sutra of Shan Tuo Katyayana, the Buddha teaches him the meaning of right view: apart from being and apart from non-being. If among dharmas there were even a bit of determinate being, the Buddha should not refute being; if non-being, having refuted being, were taken by people to be nothing, then the Buddha, penetrating the characteristics of dharmas, says that both sides are absent. Therefore you should give up views of being and non-being. Furthermore:

「若法實有性，後則不應異；

"If a dharma truly has nature, afterward it should not change;